Pathfinder 1E Paizo Annoucement!

[hong]

If 3e sucked as hard as certain people are claiming, why did so many people play it for so many years? It's not like there's not a few hundred competing games...

On encounter pacing: In last night's game, the PCs could have rested (and restored their abilities) or pressed on. They were in a race to retrieve the MacGuffin, and so chose to press on. This decision was of dramatic importance, because each battle without rest weakened them. If they were at full strength after every fight, there is no drama in the decision to keep moving.

DMs who set up plots where it doesn't matter how long it takes to achieve a goal make 3x dull, not the encounter system. Those DMs would run dull games in 4e, too.

There are many, many sources of drama other than "do we stop now, or keep moving?".

 

[Wormwood]

I don't think anybody is saying it sucked.

I'm saying it was fun to play (at certain levels with certain groups), but I'll cheerfully admit that 3e sucked to DM.

In my experience, naturally. YMMV.

 

[Ingolf]

If 3e sucked as hard as certain people are claiming, why did so many people play it for so many years? It's not like there's not a few hundred competing games...

Pointing out it's flaws is not the same thing as saying it sucks. I think most of the people in this thread - pro-3.5, pro-Pathfinder and pro-4e, agree that 3.5 has problems. Where we disagree is in how best to fix them.

As to the competing games - you tend to play what you can find a group to play with. I'd love to be running or playing in a Spirit of the Century game right now, but my group has the free time for exactly one game per week, and the game with the most mindshare is D&D. So that's what we play.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

There are many, many sources of drama other than "do we stop now, or keep moving?".

Probably the most enjoyable source of drama I've experienced in D&D isn't the question of "Stop or keep going?" but the realization that you can't stop now and you have to keep going.

I love that runnin' on fumes, back against the wall feeling.

 

[Lacyon]

Certain people will always claim things suck really hard, that didn't. But they're the minority. Most people who like 4E also like 3E, but think 4E will be better. 4E can be better than 3E without 3E sucking.

Absolutely. I'm really positive on 4e myself, but I don't think it'll totally replace 3e.

As an example: in 3E I find that frequently success or failure in the game revolves around stacking enough different buffs up to achieve a bonus high enough to overcome X (be it AC, DR, skill check DC, whatever) or bypassing obstacles completely (spider climb, fly, teleport, et al). I'd like the game to move away from that, primarily because it means that magical ability becomes way more potent than everything else. From what I've seen 4E looks to be a step (possibly a quite large step) in the right direction.

That doesn't mean I don't enjoy the "buff everybody to the hilt" game or the "bypass this obstacle with a spell or two" game - I'll still probably want to go back and play them every once in a while. It's fun, but it's grown kind of stale.

 

[hong]

Probably the most enjoyable source of drama I've experienced in D&D isn't the question of "Stop or keep going?" but the realization that you can't stop now and you have to keep going.

I love that runnin' on fumes, back against the wall feeling.

Huh. The most enjoyable source of drama for me is when you HAVE stopped, and you ARE rested up, and you're STILL not sure if you'll survive the fight with the BBEG.

 

[Azzy]

Right - so did I. We both draw on a huge amount of experience in that regard, experience that a new DM will lack. My guess is that WotC's goal is to write an encounter-creation system that will make that lack of experience less of a stumbling block. Changing the resource management paradigm for the player characters goes hand in hand with that goal.

If it makes things easier for the new guys, that's a goal worth pursuing. Unlike some (of the other) grognards, I fully realize that our hobby depends on the influx of new blood. Creating less of a barrier, especially rues-wise, for the newbies to stumble upon is a design goal to be embraced (I get annoyed when people talk about "dumbing down" the system as if needless complexity makes a game better--it doesn't). That's why I hope that 4e is a success--it, as D&D has always been, will be a "gateway" game that will introduce new players to the concepts of roleplaying games and allow them easier access to other RPGs that are extremely fun, but not as eloquently presented or easy to pick up, and add them to their repertoire of games.* D&D's success (as it's always been) is the success of the gaming industry.

*I didn't invent run-on sentences, but I should be given an award for making them an art form.

No doubt - but I did say that the pre-designed encounters were *part* of the reason for Pathfinder's popularity, not the only reason.

Fair enough.

And clearly, for at least some 4e early adopters, the storylines/plots are not sufficient reason to stick with Pathfinder. Certainly plenty of people have expressed disappointment with Paizo's move specifically because they want the Pathfinder adventures playable without having to convert them to 4e.

And I'm cool with that (really, I don't expect anyone except those who plan on running both systems or really want to work at converting to actually stick around with Pathfinder). I'm also cool with the 4e-love, too--it may not be for me, but it's not an option I want to take away from anyone else (that's just be sad and pathetic). No, as my fellow gamers, I hope that 4e lives up to your (the collective you) expectations.

The things that I haven't been cool with are the aggressive 3.x-haters (you know the types that want to belittle those who choose to stay with 3.5, or make wild claims that 3.x sucks and any fun had with it is in spite of it) and the Paizo-bashing (like the "Paizo betrayed 4e" etc.). Unfortunately there's been a lot of that and it's really sad. I understand and sympathize with the Paizo fans that plan on going to 4e being disappointed. No, it's not them--it's the ones declaring a fatwah against 3.x and its supporters and a crusade against Paizo that disappoint me. And to be fair, there's people like that on my side of the fence and they disappoint me even more (because that are on my side of the fence). Hopefully, the haters on both sides get a swift kick in the pants and stop trying to fracture this community even more than it is.

 

[Wormwood]

Huh. The most enjoyable source of drama for me is when you HAVE stopped, and you ARE rested up, and you're STILL not sure if you'll survive the fight with the BBEG.

This.

It's more tense to realize that *at your best*, you still might not be good enough.

 

[Azzy]

As to the competing games - you tend to play what you can find a group to play with. I'd love to be running or playing in a Spirit of the Century game right now, but my group has the free time for exactly one game per week, and the game with the most mindshare is D&D. So that's what we play.

Have you considered running different games on alternate weeks. That what my group would do whenever we wanted to play more than one RPG.

 

[Azzy]

Probably the most enjoyable source of drama I've experienced in D&D isn't the question of "Stop or keep going?" but the realization that you can't stop now and you have to keep going.

I love that runnin' on fumes, back against the wall feeling.

Or the "can't dick around, we're running out of time" vibe. A good nail-biter gets 'em every time.